Short-term outcome analysis of a randomized study comparing laparoscopic vs open colectomy for colon cancer.

The authors examined the impact of the laparoscopic approach on the early outcome of resected colon carcinomas. The role of laparoscopic techniques in the treatment of colon carcinomas is questionable. Previous studies have suggested technical feasibility of surgical resections of these cancers by laparoscopic means and have implied a benefit to laparoscopic technique for patients undergoing colorectal resections. A prospective, randomized study was conducted comparing laparoscopic assisted colectomy (LAC) open colectomy (OC) for colon cancer. We present the preliminary results in relation to the short-term outcome and judge the feasibility of the laparoscopic procedure to as a way of performing accurate oncologic resection and staging. Benefit has been demonstrated with LAC in this setting. Passing flatus, oral intake, and discharge from hospital occurred earlier in LAC- than OC-treated patients. The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LAC group than in the OC group. The overall morbidity was significantly lower in the LAC group. No significant differences were observed between both groups in the number of lymph nodes removed or the pathological stage following the Astler-Coller modification of the Dukes classification. The laparoscopic approach improves the short-term outcome of segmental colectomies for colon cancer. However, the further follow-up of these patients will allow us to answer in the near future whether or not the LAC may influence the long-term outcome.